Quote:"You're correct about what prejudice means, however I don't know how you missed that the term "biblefaggot" implies that an individual is a faggot simply because of their religious beliefs, and nothing more; which IS prejudice."

I fail to see how being against someone for believing something is prejudice, imagine this scenario: 'I believe that all of the French should be shot'. You would probably be against this and state that opinion of the matter, and you'd have reason to dislike this person for that belief.

If you identify as a religion as a general rule you probably do agree with what the holy scriptures say (else you get into all sorts of complicated things like how much you have to accept to actually be classed as it), so it's pretty safe to assume that a Christian would believe that if you don't follow Jesus you will burn in hell for all eternity. If you were against thinking that then you would not be prejudiced in saying so, there is a reason to be in that it's a pretty horrible thing to go spreading around, 'do this or you will be in eternal suffering', and no I'm not saying that EVERY Christian would go spreading that around but apparently to you me saying 'general rule' means every follower of that religion.

Quote:"The point is insulting someone just based on their religion is a very personal issue, and could harshly offend a lot of people."

So is offending them based solely on their gender or sexuality but you don't see them getting special mentions.

Quote:"Would it be ok with you, Bob, if a new player joins the server, mentions they are of a specific religion, and someone makes fun of them for it causing the new player to quit the server?"

No it wouldn't, neither would I be okay if they quit the server for constantly being PvPed or bullied for having a stupid name or harrassing that person in general. I wouldn't be okay if anyone was made to quit the server for any reason. I'm not saying it's okay to do it, I'm just saying it's nothing deserving of a special mention, where worse things aren't. It does not need a special mention as it would come under '5) The continuous insulting and verbal abusement of another player is considered harassment.'

Quote:"I see no difference at all in making fun of someone based on their religion and making fun of someone based on their race."

Then you are the person being morally wrong here, you can choose your religion, you can't choose your race. If there was something you found that you were massively against in that religion you could leave it. If someone else finds something they're massively against in a religion they should have every right to be allowed to speak up. Yeah not every individual agrees with everything in their religion but it's not as bad to moan at someone for that aspect than to moan at them for having a skin colour, mainly because it is actually written down for that religion that they have to follow a certain rule that may well be controversial.

Quote:"Both are judging someone without any other knowledge of who they are or the in-depths of what they think."

Christian- Follows Jesus, likely believes in heaven or hell, probably follows the Bible and knows the rules it speaks of within yet still choose to accept it.
Being French- You are French.

You can tell a lot more about someone by their religion.

Quote:"I'd also like to mention that you're totally wrong for generalizing "all Christians oppress homosexuals" - you should really know more about a religion before you go making assumptions about every person following the religion first."

Misquoted me, I said 'as a general rule', not once there did I say all members of that religion, if I were to go in to specifics then the post would be a lot longer than it would have been. Also, 'you should know more about [...] before making assumptions' isn't that sentence in itself hypocritical, you've no idea how much I do or do not know about it.

Quote:"Also, making fun of gender and sexuality falls under this category: Section 4 - 5) "The continuous insulting and verbal abusement of another player is considered harassment." I think regardless if a person is being verbally abused or made fun of, if the victim asks the abuser to stop, they should be inclined to stop no matter what the person is being verbally abused about."

Exactly, if they don't get a special mention and just go under that rule, why does religion get special mention?

You seem to be misunderstanding the point here and trying to make me look the bad guy. I am NOT saying making fun of someone's beliefs is bad, I am saying that it is no where near as bad as to get grouped in with racism (atleast when sexuality and gender aren't), and should be taken out of that section and be kept to the general abuse and harassment rule. I say this because you get people trying to get others banned for saying 'biblefaggot' when far worse stuff has been said.

The offensive bit in biblefag is not that they're calling them a faggot for being a Christian, it's that they seem to think being called gay is an insult, and quite frankly it's disgusting that people think being called a faggot is grounds for a ban because they find it offensive. Faggot is not offensive because it's calling people gay, it's offensive because people think it's a bad thing to be called and so use it as an insult.

With that in mind,

Quote:"I don't know how you missed that the term "biblefaggot" implies that an individual is a faggot simply because of their religious beliefs"

, I deliver a big 'Fuck you' to you sir, for you put the emphasis in the wrong place in that you evidently do think being called homosexual is an insult.

Still haven't proof read, have fun!
TL;DR yeah making fun of someone is bad, but it shouldn't get a special mention because then people try to take advantage and get people banned for undeserving reasons.

(08-29-2013 01:39 PM)Boblobster Wrote: Racism is far worse, you cannot change your skin colour or nationality, and it says next to nothing about who you really are, making fun of that is completely uncalled for. Insulting a religion is just insulting what someone thinks, if you wanna ban for that then you best start banning every time someone makes fun of someone else for being homosexual, because that's worse.

Sorry i'm late to the party.

Bob, first off, insulting a religion is also insulting a part of the individual. It is just the same, as insulting someones race, sex, etc. It is a part of them that can be identified. In the real world, employers cannot even ask about religious beliefs. If you saw an employee refer to someone as a biblefag, they would be fired. It is very offensive.

It's only part of the individual because they choose it to be, you cannot choose your race, gender or sexuality. I am not saying insulting someone for their religion isn't bad, I'm saying it does not deserve a special mention, especially when gender and sexuality do not.

Just because you can be identified as being a member of a religion does not mean you can get special permission to get offended by it. You can be identified as being a murderer too, or a sex offender, doesn't mean you aren't allowed to do or say anything about it if you disagree just because it's part of their being.

(08-29-2013 09:19 PM)Boblobster Wrote: If you identify as a religion as a general rule you probably do agree with what the holy scriptures say (else you get into all sorts of complicated things like how much you have to accept to actually be classed as it), so it's pretty safe to assume that a Christian would believe that if you don't follow Jesus you will burn in hell for all eternity. If you were against thinking that then you would not be prejudiced in saying so, there is a reason to be in that it's a pretty horrible thing to go spreading around, 'do this or you will be in eternal suffering', and no I'm not saying that EVERY Christian would go spreading that around but apparently to you me saying 'general rule' means every follower of that religion.

I never said a person is prejudice for opposing a certain religion, all I'm saying is don't go around insulting people FOR following a certain religion. Is that a hard concept to grasp?

Quote:"The point is insulting someone just based on their religion is a very personal issue, and could harshly offend a lot of people."

(08-29-2013 09:19 PM)Boblobster Wrote: So is offending them based solely on their gender or sexuality but you don't see them getting special mentions.

You're right, someone may take huge offence to a sexist post, or what have you, and I do agree sexism should probably be mentioned along with race and religion as well.

Quote:"I see no difference at all in making fun of someone based on their religion and making fun of someone based on their race."

(08-29-2013 09:19 PM)Boblobster Wrote: Then you are the person being morally wrong here, you can choose your religion, you can't choose your race. If there was something you found that you were massively against in that religion you could leave it. If someone else finds something they're massively against in a religion they should have every right to be allowed to speak up. Yeah not every individual agrees with everything in their religion but it's not as bad to moan at someone for that aspect than to moan at them for having a skin colour, mainly because it is actually written down for that religion that they have to follow a certain rule that may well be controversial.

See gamem's reply.

Quote:"Both are judging someone without any other knowledge of who they are or the in-depths of what they think."

(08-29-2013 09:19 PM)Boblobster Wrote: Christian- Follows Jesus, likely believes in heaven or hell, probably follows the Bible and knows the rules it speaks of within yet still choose to accept it.
Being French- You are French.

You can tell a lot more about someone by their religion.

That's why I said "the in-depths of what they think". Saying "I am a Christian" only tells you one thing about what they believe.

Quote:"I'd also like to mention that you're totally wrong for generalizing "all Christians oppress homosexuals" - you should really know more about a religion before you go making assumptions about every person following the religion first."

(08-29-2013 09:19 PM)Boblobster Wrote: Misquoted me, I said 'as a general rule', not once there did I say all members of that religion, if I were to go in to specifics then the post would be a lot longer than it would have been. Also, 'you should know more about [...] before making assumptions' isn't that sentence in itself hypocritical, you've no idea how much I do or do not know about it.

You saying that "as a general rule, Christians oppose homosexuals" tells me that you don't know that much about Christianity, that is why I said you should learn more about it before making that assumption.

(08-29-2013 09:19 PM)Boblobster Wrote: You seem to be misunderstanding the point here and trying to make me look the bad guy. I am NOT saying making fun of someone's beliefs is bad, I am saying that it is no where near as bad as to get grouped in with racism (atleast when sexuality and gender aren't), and should be taken out of that section and be kept to the general abuse and harassment rule. I say this because you get people trying to get others banned for saying 'biblefaggot' when far worse stuff has been said.

Once again, to a person, making fun of something that represents who they are could heavily offend someone to the point of leaving the server; whether it be race, religion, sex, whatever. IE none of it should be allowed.

(08-29-2013 09:19 PM)Boblobster Wrote: The offensive bit in biblefag is not that they're calling them a faggot for being a Christian, it's that they seem to think being called gay is an insult, and quite frankly it's disgusting that people think being called a faggot is grounds for a ban because they find it offensive. Faggot is not offensive because it's calling people gay, it's offensive because people think it's a bad thing to be called and so use it as an insult.

The term "faggot" is used as an insult by some people. It was clear that the people saying "biblefaggot" were using the term "faggot" as an insult directed toward people that follow the bible.

(08-29-2013 09:19 PM)Boblobster Wrote: With that in mind, [quote]"I don't know how you missed that the term "biblefaggot" implies that an individual is a faggot simply because of their religious beliefs"

(08-29-2013 09:19 PM)Boblobster Wrote: , I deliver a big 'Fuck you' to you sir, for you put the emphasis in the wrong place in that you evidently do think being called homosexual is an insult.

You're saying "fuck you" to me, yet you say nothing to the people who actually used "faggot" as an insult? Nice.

If you want to talk to me more about this, bob, message me on steam or something. I'm done posting this on the forums.

(08-29-2013 10:16 PM)Boblobster Wrote: It's only part of the individual because they choose it to be, you cannot choose your race, gender or sexuality. I am not saying insulting someone for their religion isn't bad, I'm saying it does not deserve a special mention, especially when gender and sexuality do not.

Just because you can be identified as being a member of a religion does not mean you can get special permission to get offended by it. You can be identified as being a murderer too, or a sex offender, doesn't mean you aren't allowed to do or say anything about it if you disagree just because it's part of their being.

Indeed you can get offended by it. Everyone has a religion they go on. Even atheism is a religion. Yes, you choose your religion. But it does not give people the right to make fun of, or insult what you choose. It is just like saying because people choose their wife, i can make fun of her for as long as I want, insulting her, etc, and the husband does not have the right to get offended by it.

What if, say, that wife was a violent alcoholic that had a history of burglary and other such crimes? You'd have good reason to doubt his choices. Also, I am not saying it's okay to do it like for the 12th time, I'm saying it's not as bad as you make it out to be. The husband has the right to be offended sure, but does that mean none of them have a right to speak bad of his wife? No, no it does not.

Yeah you can get offended by it, but who cares? Being offended does not give you special rights to do something.

Also, if atheism is a religion then off is a TV channel and an empty glass contains a drink, but that's irrelevant.

(08-29-2013 10:30 PM)gamemaster1494 Wrote: Indeed you can get offended by it. Everyone has a religion they go on. Even atheism is a religion. Yes, you choose your religion. But it does not give people the right to make fun of, or insult what you choose. It is just like saying because people choose their wife, i can make fun of her for as long as I want, insulting her, etc, and the husband does not have the right to get offended by it.

Comedy isn't about what you can and can't joke about. A lot of jokes are funny because it's a subject people normally don't dare to talk about like religion. Sure it might offend some people but comedy isn't about insulting people, it's about making people laugh and if that offends someone they missed the point of it.

The bottom line is: what was the intention of the person who offended people, did he want to offend or did he want to make a joke? It it was all in good fun then why get offended? It's just words, people curse at each other all day online and it's mostly just as a joke.

(08-29-2013 10:39 PM)Boblobster Wrote: What if, say, that wife was a violent alcoholic that had a history of burglary and other such crimes? You'd have good reason to doubt his choices. Also, I am not saying it's okay to do it like for the 12th time, I'm saying it's not as bad as you make it out to be. The husband has the right to be offended sure, but does that mean none of them have a right to speak bad of his wife? No, no it does not.

Yeah you can get offended by it, but who cares? Being offended does not give you special rights to do something.

Also, if atheism is a religion then off is a TV channel and an empty glass contains a drink, but that's irrelevant.

"Yeah you can get offended by it, but who cares?" The person getting offended?

"Being offended does not give you special rights to do something."

So then being offended over something like "negrofaggot" doesn't give you the right to do something? Okay. Makes sense.

Why are you assuming the wife is a raging alcoholic? Are you implying that all bible believer are raging alcoholics and should be treated as such?

Race, religion, sexual preference. All of these are touchy issues. Why do you think its a big deal when someone was denied something based on one of these in the news? Most everyone believes that we can be offended with these. That is why it is a touchy issue. Calling out a group and insulting them would not be tolerated in the real world period. You could get sued and fired. It is in the rules because of this.

re·li·gion
/riˈlijən/
Noun
The belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.
Details of belief as taught or discussed.

Atheism is the lack of belief in a God, there are no set rules or teachings you follow, how is it possibly a religion? It is the lack of religion.

Yeah the person getting offended cares, but why does that mean they get special treatment from the police or any law enforcer, or in this case staff on a minecraft server? People get offended all the time for loads of reasons, some times offence overlaps and someone being offended at one thing can offend someone else, why should any which side get the sympathy? They should work it out between themselves and not get someone in a higher position than them to take sides.

Also, I am the one here saying how racism is worse than insulting a religion, where even is the logic in trying to say that I'm saying people shouldn't get offended in it. The difference in getting offended by religion and race is religion is a set of beliefs that you have that other people may disagree with, race says next to nothing about you so it can only really be prejudice.

No I am not assuming that all Christians are like that... The real question is why did you assume there was nothing wrong with the wife so no one had any reason or right to complain about her? I specifically asked 'what if she was', and all you've done is think I meant 'lol every Christian is alcoholic' rather than answer my question in the given situation. The fact that I asked 'what if' in itself shows that I didn't assume it...

I am NOT saying it should not be against the rules, I AM saying specifically religion shouldn't get a special mention when there's worse things to insult about that are not mentioned, and because I think there should at least be a degree of freedom of speech here. Stop trying to make me the bad guy here, the only problem I have is that this server apparently punishes discrimination of religion more severely than discrimination of sexuality or gender, not that it punishes discrimination of religion in the first place.

Also, just because something is in the law/real world does not mean it is definitely right, why do you think there are so many arguments surrounding politics, rights and religion in the first place?